Judge asked to reconsider decree in du Pont will case

MEDIA COURTHOUSE -- Judge Joseph Cronin heard arguments Thursday on a motion to reconsider his August decree that granted Mark P. Schultz and Daniel G. Chaid standing to challenge the last will and testament of the late eccentric millionaire murderer John du Pont.

Du Pont was sentenced to 13 to 30 years in 1997 for the 1996 murder of Olympic gold medalist David Schultz after a jury found him to be "guilty but mentally ill." He was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, a mental illness all the petitioners believe he never recovered from while serving his sentence at Cresson State Prison near Altoona. John du Pont died Dec. 9, 2010, at the age of 72.

His will, drafted in September 2010, bequeaths 80 percent of the du Pont estate to Bulgarian wrestler Valentin Jordanov Dimitrov, his wife, Zdravka Moneta Atanosova Dimitrov, and their relatives.

Mark Schultz, brother of the late David Schultz, and Chaid, a former coach at du Pont's estate, were named in five successive wills and codicils between 1990 and July 1994, with the 1994 document being the last to be drafted before John du Pont's incarceration.

Advertisement

Joseph Viola, representing the petitioners, has argued that all of the instruments drafted after the "guilty but mentally ill" verdict was entered could be invalidated because of John du Pont's mental health.

In his August decree, Cronin took into account two prior decrees entered by Judge A. Leo Sereni in 1997 and 1998 related to a petition from John du Pont's family questioning his ability to manage his estate.

While Cronin noted Sereni did not address the merits of that petition -- it was withdrawn rather than ruled upon -- he did take into account observations Sereni had made about du Pont's mental state at that time and found Chaid and Schultz could potentially succeed in challenging six wills going back to 1997.

Taras Wochok, longtime attorney for John du Pont and the executor of his estate, argued the court had abused its discretion in reaching that conclusion, and argued the August decree appeared to rest on the flawed premise that if someone had ever experienced any mental illness in their lifetime, then they are no longer capable of making a valid will.

Wochok pointed to a recent Superior Court decision denying the appeal of a similar will challenge put forth by John du Pont's niece and nephew, Beverly A. du Pont Gauggel and William H. du Pont.

The Superior Court disagreed with the assertion that all prior wills should be treated as a single instrument and Wochok argued the same reasoning would have to be applied here.

But that would mean Chaid and Schultz would bear the burden of showing John du Pont lacked the capacity at the time he executed each of the wills they seek to invalidate, which, according to Wochok, they likely would not be able to do.

Viola countered that Wochok had conflated the issue of standing with irrelevant facts unrelated to the issue at hand, claiming neither Sereni's decrees nor the Superior Court's reasoning have anything to do with this case.

Viola also indicated that if the case proceeds beyond a preliminary objection phase, he would seek Wochok's disqualification as counsel because he would likely be an important fact witness.

Wochok has additionally moved to strike the Delaware Museum of Natural History as a party to Chaid and Schutlz's petition. Wochok claimed the museum had not complied with various court orders and failed to state a cause of action. Michael Sheridan, representing the DMNH, argued that many of the cited orders were not directed at the museum, however, and Wochok's arguments regarding legal insufficiency have already been rejected by the court.

Cronin said he would try to address the various issues in decrees within two weeks.